Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Amp for Grado
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Amp for Grado - Page 3

post #31 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoelse View Post

 

Don't buy MS-pro or RA-1?

Ra-1

post #32 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrislangley4253 View Post

The M-stage is a very good sounding amp to my ears. Who is sobbing? lol

Crying because the O2 is not the world's greatest headphone amp!rolleyes.gif
post #33 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post


Crying because the O2 is not the world's greatest headphone amp!rolleyes.gif

 

No one claimed it was. What even makes the "greatest amp"? In my opinion there are tons of amps tied for first place, including the O2. I strive for transparency in my gear. If I can't hear the amp, I dig it. My matrix didn't noticeably color the music compared to my O2, but then again.. back then I wasn't using the super relentless t50rp. That headphone is really revealing. Maybe the differences between the o2 and matrix would have been more noticeable. 

i couldn't tell a difference using Magnums or hd595. I think that speaks highly for both amps.

post #34 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrislangley4253 View Post

No one claimed it was. What even makes the "greatest amp"? In my opinion there are tons of amps tied for first place, including the O2. I strive for transparency in my gear. If I can't hear the amp, I dig it. My matrix didn't noticeably color the music compared to my O2, but then again.. back then I wasn't using the super relentless t50rp. That headphone is really revealing. Maybe the differences between the o2 and matrix would have been more noticeable. 


i couldn't tell a difference using Magnums or hd595. I think that speaks highly for both amps.

Maybe I should have added a "Sarcasm Alert!"

BTW, if I can't hear the amp, then I check to see if it is plugged in or the On/Off switch is set to ON!
post #35 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post


Maybe I should have added a "Sarcasm Alert!"
BTW, if I can't hear the amp, then I check to see if it is plugged in or the On/Off switch is set to ON!

 

Then you use your amps as an EQ... To each their own man.

post #36 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melvins View Post

Ra-1

I already have the miniRA1, 39 bucks. I love Grado and if they build RA-1 for their amp I only can assume they know better than us.Of course I also agree there are better amp out there and I am interested to audit them.

post #37 of 50

buy MS Pro it is sweet headphone wink_face.gif and it is accordng to a few people the most close production headphone to HP2 and amp I know it is probably more than you want spend but many people like them overal with Mapple Tree as sombody already recomended. 

And I disagree that Grado sounds good out of mp3 player it is harsh and tones really no good, truth is some lower models like SR225 sound very nice out of portable dac/amps but for example MS Pro did not show what they can. So get Mapple Tree or some nice Jfet solid state amp which is a little smoother like HeadAmp Lite/GS1 or diy Dispre II v4

post #38 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post


Maybe I should have added a "Sarcasm Alert!"
BTW, if I can't hear the amp, then I check to see if it is plugged in or the On/Off switch is set to ON!

this.

post #39 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrislangley4253 View Post

 

Then you use your amps as an EQ... To each their own man.

Perhaps you could explain the disdain for using an "amp as an EQ".  An equalizer is a deliberate frequency response modifier.  An amp may also be a response modifier, and if the results are favorable, it's also an EQ. How is that different?  In fact, an EQ, if analog, may contain a lot more active electronics than an amp, increasing the chances for distortion and noise.  A digital EQ, is different of course, so long as its positioned in the bit stream before the DAC, but I'm hoping you're not referring to the EQ inside an iPod, which is frustratingly simplistic from a control standpoint, and remarkably dirty from an audio standpoint.

 

Just confused as to how you think one method is different enough to be so much more preferred.  

post #40 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrislangley4253 View Post

Then you use your amps as an EQ... To each their own man.

Ohhhhhh,
I don't even think I want to dignify that with a proper answer! mad.gif
post #41 of 50

You guys are killing me, honestly
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by knopi View Post

buy MS Pro it is sweet headphone wink_face.gif and it is accordng to a few people the most close production headphone to HP2 and amp I know it is probably more than you want spend but many people like them overal with Mapple Tree as sombody already recomended. 

And I disagree that Grado sounds good out of mp3 player it is harsh and tones really no good, truth is some lower models like SR225 sound very nice out of portable dac/amps but for example MS Pro did not show what they can. So get Mapple Tree or some nice Jfet solid state amp which is a little smoother like HeadAmp Lite/GS1 or diy Dispre II v4

 

The closest headphone to the HF2 is gonna be one based off magnum drivers.. At least, that's what all the dudes that own tons of grados and magnums usually have to say about it. I can't comment that much on the ms pro because I was using a lame audio gd sparrow at the time.. Which was actually really harsh, the ms pro was surprisingly smooth even off this terrible source. Looking back on it, that's pretty shocking. They sounded great with jazz.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaddie View Post

Perhaps you could explain the disdain for using an "amp as an EQ".  An equalizer is a deliberate frequency response modifier.  An amp may also be a response modifier, and if the results are favorable, it's also an EQ. How is that different?  In fact, an EQ, if analog, may contain a lot more active electronics than an amp, increasing the chances for distortion and noise.  A digital EQ, is different of course, so long as its positioned in the bit stream before the DAC, but I'm hoping you're not referring to the EQ inside an iPod, which is frustratingly simplistic from a control standpoint, and remarkably dirty from an audio standpoint.

 

Just confused as to how you think one method is different enough to be so much more preferred.  

 

Okay, when you use an amp as EQ you are forever deciding to color all of your music from here on out and to some unknown perimeters (unless your ears are that good. I could probably listen for a while and be close to knowing exactly how much the amp is coloring different frequency bands, but I've also been listening critically for two years now. I wouldn't expect a beginner to be able to do this, at all) . What works for one genre will likely not be ideal for another.. Now, if your amp somehow manages to perfectly pair with your headphone and works for all genres, great. If you long listen to one genre, great. But, someone just starting out should definitely shoot for neutral, uncolored gear while they are trying to find a pair of headphones that suits them. If your happy with tubes, I don't care.. I'm glad you are happy. I just wouldn't suggest anyone to use them. Particularly a beginner/someone on a budget.

I definitely was not suggesting an analog EQ and I never said anything about an iPod, ever. OTHER people in this thread own iPods rolleyes.gif

post #42 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrislangley4253 View Post

Okay, when you use an amp as EQ you are forever deciding to color all of your music from here on out and to some unknown perimeters (unless your ears are that good. I could probably listen for a while and be close to knowing exactly how much the amp is coloring different frequency bands, but I've also been listening critically for two years now. I wouldn't expect a beginner to be able to do this, at all) . What works for one genre will likely not be ideal for another.. Now, if your amp somehow manages to perfectly pair with your headphone and works for all genres, great. If you long listen to one genre, great. But, someone just starting out should definitely shoot for neutral, uncolored gear while they are trying to find a pair of headphones that suits them. If your happy with tubes, I don't care.. I'm glad you are happy. I just wouldn't suggest anyone to use them. Particularly a beginner/someone on a budget.

I definitely was not suggesting an analog EQ and I never said anything about an iPod, ever. OTHER people in this thread own iPods rolleyes.gif

 

 

OK, but when you pick your headphones you've just done exactly that...settled into living with "permanent" colored sound, probably a bit worse because accurate headphones are not the norm, they're actually the exception.  You've colored everything you play just by choosing that particular pair of headphones.  If a headphone amp results in generally improved sound, reversing or compensating for some other deficiency, what's the problem?  It's actually the first definition of equalization: compensation for undesired frequency response.  Might even consider it the headphone equivalent of room EQ.

 

You're referring to the acquired skill of identifying response issues and responding to them.  This skill is admittedly not found in beginners, though most can identify the large general issues, like they don't think there's enough bass or enough treble.  And, everyone has at least some reference to go by: life itself. 

 

I'll beg to disagree that EQ is genre specific.  Good sounding gear is good sounding gear, but there are many degrees of wrong that might compliment certain types.  It would be very unusual to have high quality gear that sounds wrong on some genres.  While mastering labs don't have codified monitor standards, mastering engineers are pretty sensitive guys, and it turns out their monitor systems aren't radically different.  If a mix sounds unusual (too dull, bright, bass-heavy, etc) it was probably deliberately mastered that way.  Who are we to try to apply an inverse EQ curve to an unknown mastering EQ?  I favor the "get it right, play it all the same" approach to experience what they meant for me to hear.

 

Anyone who deliberately buys colored gear, headphones or otherwise, will eventually tire of it, regardless of genre.  I would add that everyone should shoot for neutrality, as it's very easy to move away from neutral, but much harder to get there from severely colored.

 

The tube thing is personal and highly psycho-suggetive.  The end result of amp design has much less to do with the active component, more to do with good circuit design.  The high operating impedances of tubes make driving a load directly hard to do, and frankly, mostly what you get is the result of huge engineering compromises just for the sake of using a tube. Apply the most appropriate technology, get the best result.  Tubes do provide a tactile and visual influence that is inescapable.  I know I'll be shot at with a tubular blunderbuss for this, but I believe it to be true, and that's having grown up in audio with tubes...the first time around, not the various resurrections.  I built my own tube gear, and preferred tube amps until solid state designs caught up, which took a while. 

 

Good to hear you wren't advocating the built-in iPod EQ!  But analog EQ can be good, so can digital EQ. There's no picking a favorite technology. There are bad examples in both worlds too.  

 
Just to wrap, I don't see anything wrong with using the pairing of an amp and headphones as an audible improvement equalizer that you live with long term.  You already are doing it to a much greater extent with the headphones themselves.  
post #43 of 50

I appreciate your argument.. We will just have to agree to disagree on a couple of the points.


Mainly that it's a good idea to add more coloration via a tube amp when you already probably have colored headphones. I'd suggest to shoot for neutral or transparent gear.. and then to try to use EQ to work out the quirks in the given headphone.


Also, if you have "transparent" gear, you can better pick your headphones. You'll at least have a better idea what the headphones sound like instead of what the headphones and a tube amp sound like.

I don't really think EQ is genre specific.. so much as it is mastering specific. Lots and lots of music is mastered and recorded just terribly. EQ can really help with that (and so can lower tier headphones, actually. They hide some of the glaring errors). I mean, even really big names release terribly mastered albums. A rather large section of my music collection has probably never even seen a real studio or mastering engineer.. Some of these recordings still manage to sound better than some of the "professionally mastered" albums in my library. It's really a bummer to discover clipping present on a master done by a "pro".

There is no right or wrong method. Whatever makes the user enjoy the music is what's right for them. I don't think it's inherently wrong to use tube gear.. I just don't suggest it to beginners.

*throws his arms up into the air*  I'd probably have some sort of a tube amp if I had the money.. Just for the sake of having one. They do have gobs of style, if nothing else.

post #44 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrislangley4253 View Post

I appreciate your argument.. We will just have to agree to disagree on a couple of the points.


Mainly that it's a good idea to add more coloration via a tube amp when you already probably have colored headphones. I'd suggest to shoot for neutral or transparent gear.. and then to try to use EQ to work out the quirks in the given headphone.


Also, if you have "transparent" gear, you can better pick your headphones. You'll at least have a better idea what the headphones sound like instead of what the headphones and a tube amp sound like.

I don't really think EQ is genre specific.. so much as it is mastering specific. Lots and lots of music is mastered and recorded just terribly. EQ can really help with that (and so can lower tier headphones, actually. They hide some of the glaring errors). I mean, even really big names release terribly mastered albums. A rather large section of my music collection has probably never even seen a real studio or mastering engineer.. Some of these recordings still manage to sound better than some of the "professionally mastered" albums in my library. It's really a bummer to discover clipping present on a master done by a "pro".

There is no right or wrong method. Whatever makes the user enjoy the music is what's right for them. I don't think it's inherently wrong to use tube gear.. I just don't suggest it to beginners.

*throws his arms up into the air*  I'd probably have some sort of a tube amp if I had the money.. Just for the sake of having one. They do have gobs of style, if nothing else.

.

FTR, I've heard incredibly neutral tube amps and some very coloured SS devices. This generalization is often made, but rarely accurate IME.

post #45 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post

.

FTR, I've heard incredibly neutral tube amps and some very coloured SS devices. This generalization is often made, but rarely accurate IME.

You know... I never considered the fact that many ss devices are colored. I'm a dummy, and you are totally right.
 

It's just that the goal of tube gear is usually to add some color and SS is usually to be neutral.. But, yes, that is definitely not always the case!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphone Amps (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Amp for Grado